CHAPTER FIVE - THE DEEPER REALITY UNDERLYING PARTICLES AND ELECTROMAGNETIISM CURRENTS AND ATMO...

THIS IS THE MOMENT OF OUR CREATION

CHAPTER FIVE

THE DEEPER REALITY UNDERLYING PARTICLES AND ELECTROMAGNETIISM

CURRENTS AND ATMOSPHERE IN THE GALAXY.

The rest mass of matter is produced by the raising of electron positron pairs from the potential, where they were massless, into the actuality of the cosmos which is extensioning at c and gives them their rest mass. This means these electron positron pairs are the basic units of all rest mass. Protons and neutrons and the nuclei they form are all composed of nothing but electron positron pairs. The electron positron pairs pour out of the vacuum into the plasmoids of the galaxies where protons neutrons and nuclei can be formed.

They are then caught up in a galaxy wide network of star forming currents and flow along them to power the stars.

We must distinguish between what happens in a plasmoid and what happens in the spaces of the galactic atmosphere. A plasmoid draws primary matter from the vacuum and structures it into nucleons and atoms and forms a quasar which as it grows into a new galaxy develops its own plasmoid. A quasar, like an embryo, grows and grows in mass, in size and complexity. From the beginning they contain a network of electric currents of protons and electrons forming nodes of matter along them which, as the quasar expands, become minute stellarspheres of nascent stars. The currents draw unceasingly from their plasmoid which draws unceasingly from the universal vacuum and the nucleons they carry increase in mass.

Only electron proton pairs which are not combined into atoms can be in these currents. They flow smoothly near zero temperature and do not radiate.

On the other hand those in the atmosphere of the quasar that have combined to form atoms of hydrogen and helium are drawn into the currents and carried along to provide the material for the nascent stars; or they remain outside and comprise the atmosphere of the galaxy that the quasar will develop into.

Within the quasar these atmospheric atoms are accelerated by the electro-magnetic forces of the quasar and radiate as they spiral along the magnetic field directions. As they are low mass they radiate low energy redshifted light. As the nucleons of the quasar increase in mass the redshift reduces and brightness increases.

From the very start these currents connect the source of power and particles to the stellar loads that draw on them continually. It is like an embryo developing and chance plays no part. In this way a quasar develops into a galaxy of currents and stars.

When the currents of protons and electrons reach the surfaces of stars they combine into atoms of hydrogen. Using already formed higher elements drawn up from the interior or carried in with the current, they act as catalysts which can transmute hydrogen into higher elements (the third stage of matter creation). These can then fall to the centre of the star and form solid planets.

Some of the current`s material expelled from the star`s surface flows out into the galactic atmosphere so that it is replenished from the stars as it is consumed by the currents. The whole process from vacuum to biosphere is entirely under the rational purpose of the laws and logic of Nature.

Only in the still and highly organised electro-magnetic structure of a plasmoid will protons and neutrons form without collisions that cause the melee of antiparticles and high mass ephemera. Only in the current network can power and materials be transported to the stars. Only on stellar surfaces can the higher elements form. Only in the still cool interiors of stars can planets form.

The atmospheres of galaxies are absolutely vital to this work of creation but seem to operate under a looser less confined application of the natural laws. The currents draw continually on the atmosphere for structured matter as the plasmoids draw on the vacuum for primary matter.

Currents are fairly dense and very confined and directed. In contrast the particles and atoms of the atmosphere are exceedingly tenuous, ionised dissociated unconfined and moving in all directions.

Throughout the atmosphere local and ephemeral currents of varying length and duration are forming as electro-magnetic forces move ionized particles. These currents are not star forming and did not originate in the central plasmoid.

In any volume of space a concentration of moving particles may occur as forces shift and change and may be turned by the Lorentz force into the direction of any local magnetic field and any nearby electric field that can pull them along. They then form a current which induces its own magnetic field to enclose it in a sleeve. As the current increases, the sleeve will tighten and intensify, and the current then speeds up. Other similar currents forming nearby are drawn together by their magnetic attraction and twine around each other in a current rope. Sometimes if the particles are interacting and radiating we can observe them. However these are not star forming currents and have nothing to do with the established galactic network.

They are only local and temporary and inevitably disperse. They are not drawing on the inexhaustible vacuum but only on whatever density of particles happened to come together where they began. Electro-magnetic forces will keep them flowing coherently for a while but it has no load drawing on them doing useful work. Inevitably they weaken and disperse. We observe this in Herbig Haro jets from active stars which can cross several light years before dispersing in a cloud radiating in radio.

On a vaster scale active galaxies eject huge currents along their axes of rotation that can extend for hundreds of thousands of light years and then break up and disperse in vast clouds emitting powerful radio waves. They have a source which even in a galaxy will not be everlasting but there is no load drawing on them, so they must disperse eventually.

However these local ephemeral currents in space do have a vital part to play in the galactic economy.

They keep its atmosphere stirred up and ionized by accelerating its particles and widely dispersing them. This ensures a large population of ionized particles and atoms which the star forming currents can draw in. It also prevents the particles from eventually combining into atoms and molecules which being neutral would not be drawn into currents so easily. Stars do not form from clouds of neutral matter.

It also means that the star forming currents are moving through an ever-changing and varied atmosphere. So the stars they form from will vary in size and composition. All stars are varied individuals even though the laws of nature that formed then are unchanging. Many particles in the atmosphere are moving at relativistic speeds. Their rest mass has been greatly increased by extra inertial mass. When they collide with other particles there are high energy interactions similar to those studied in the huge colliders at CERN. There is the same showering of high mass short lived particles rapidly decaying to electrons protons neutrinos and gamma and all dispersing.

It is not occurring in a plasmoid or a stellar surface and has no part in the creation of stars but only in the activity of the atmosphere. In these collisions, the electron positron pairs briefly drawn from the vacuum cannot form new extra nucleons and can only fall back into the potentia leaving only the structured particles that entered the collision plus a lot of radiation.

WHAT IS RADIOACTIVITY ?

In 1934 Irene Joliot Curie, continuing the research into radioactivity begun by her mother Marie Curie thirty years before, bombarded aluminium foil with Helium nuclei (alpha particles) and rendered the aluminium radioactive. Because she and her husband Frederick were using a bubble chamber they were able to detect positrons being emitted from the radioactive aluminium. This was the first time a radioactive substance had been produced artificially. Before that radioactive ores had to be mined and purified – a long and arduous labour as her mother and father had had to do. Irene and Frederick received the Nobel Prize in 1935 and they deserved it for it made radioactive elements easily available and revolutionised cancer treatment.

With the knowledge gained since then from many experiments on every element, and also using our understanding of how protons and neutrons change into one another, together with the electron positron structure of matter, we can now explain what happened in that seminal experiment of the Curie`s.

The Aluminium 27 foil had stable nuclei made up of 13 protons and 14 neutrons. The Helium 4 nuclei had 2 protons and 2 neutrons and when they hit the aluminium nuclei they entered them raising them to nuclei of Phosphorus with 15 protons. One of the helium neutrons also joined making Phosphorus 30. The other helium neutron was expelled and alter a few minutes and some distance away, reduced to a proton and electron.

Phosphorus 30 with equal numbers of protons and neutrons is extremely unstable and needs extra neutrons. One of the phosphorus protons converted to a neutron lowering the nucleus to silicon 30 with 14 protons and 16 neutrons. This is typical of how all elements stabilise their neutron proton ratios. In the breakdown of phosphorus 30 the Curies detected positrons moving away.

Ever since then it has been assumed that when a proton converts to a neutron, a positron is created de novo at that instant from the energy of the interaction.

The emission of free positrons is also seen in collisions. For example: protons hurtling in from deep space at near light speed smash atoms in our upper atmosphere and among the fragments are positrons making about 1% of what showers down to the surface and briefly make tracks in our detectors.

Some nuclei, when protons convert to neutrons, frequently emit a positron.

The standard model of particle physics explains conversion of protons to neutrons and v.v as due to alteration of quarks within the protons and neutrons.

There are said to be up quarks with a positive charge of 2/3, and there are down quarks, slightly heavier with negative charge of 1/3. Protons have 2 up and 1 down, so +2/3 +2/3 -1/3 gives +1. The neutron has one up and two down so +2/3 -1/3 -1/3 is 0.

According to quark theory when a proton converts to a neutron, one of its up quarks changes to a down quark causing a positron and a neutrino to be created and move away. They have to be created then and there because the standard model denies that electrons and positrons can exist within the nucleons and nuclei, but because they do indeed appear they must be created from the energy available in the rearrangement. This is another consequence of Heisenberg`s Uncertainty Principle.

I argue quite differently: positrons and electrons with active charge enfold the surfaces of the nucleons and move on or off them to alter their electric charge and mass. (This is following Helicon theory). Quarks have no charge and their mass cannot be distinguished from the mass of the nucleon as a whole, this is because quarks are part of the total action of the nucleon and not separate bodies, they are groups of dancers within the dance.

In the experiment of the Curies, the incoming helium nucleus imports considerable energy into the aluminium nucleus and rearranges it to an unstable 15/15 ratio. Its protons and neutrons are excited to high energy and one of the protons is energetic enough to draw an electron positron pair directly from the vacuum in its immediate vicinity within the nucleus. At the same time it also attracts its paired electron to join its surface positron and so form a neutron. But the ep pair drawn from the vacuum will travel outwards, interact briefly and fall back into the potentia emitting two gamma rays equal to their rest masses. This will be typical of energetic collisions as well.

Positron emission often occurs in proton rich nuclei with too few neutrons.

Electron capture by a proton occurs when electrons are available in the orbitals. It requires less energy than is involved in drawing them from the potentia. Electron capture always competes with positron emission so that positrons being ejected are only seen in very proton rich nuclei. They provide useful sources of positrons. In particular carbon 11, nitrogen 13, and fluorine 18 are used in Positron Emission Tomography scanning in hospitals. The positron drawn from the potentia combines with its electron partner to form positroneum and as they fall back, emit the gamma rays used by the scanner. As a general rule if the energy in the nuclei is less than the rest mass of an ep pair, then positron emission cannot occur and electron capture is the sole decay mode.

I maintain that a proton has a positive charge, not because of its quarks but because of its surface positron, and it cannot lose it. If it did it would become a lower mass chargless proton not a higher mass neutral neutron. The proton never loses its positron, but it can draw in an electron onto its surface which increases its mass and neutralises its positive charge.

Energy in the cosmos cannot of itself produce mass, it stimulates the potentia to raise ep pairs into the cosmos and that act gives then mass. Energy alone cannot create mass; it has to come from the potentia in the form of ep pairs which are the fundamental units of all mass.

Einstein`s equation E=mc2 means that energy in the cosmos draws mass from the potentia at c continually.

When a neutron expels an electron it reverts to what it always was – a proton. That expelled electron usually rejoins the orbital system of the proton. If it leaves with energy in excess of 13.6 eV it escapes the orbital surround of the proton but remains nearby, for it is paired to its positron partner on the proton surface. The atom becomes a positive ion until it can recapture its electron.

The reader may be wondering how we can know so much about what goes on at a level so remote at trillionths and quadrillionths of a metre.

Professor Fowler in his internet article “Transforming energy into mass” gives a good explanation. “The standard operating procedure of high energy physicists is to accelerate particles to relativistic speeds, then smash them into other particles to see what happens. For example: fast protons will be aimed at protons at rest, (atoms of hydrogen). These proton-proton collisions take place inside some kind of detection apparatus so the results can be observed. One widely used detector is the bubble chamber: a transparent container filled with superheated liquid. The electric field of a rapidly moving charged particle passing close to a molecule can dislodge an electron, so an energetic particle moving through the liquid leaves a trail of ionised molecules. These give centres about which bubbles can nucleate. The bubbles grow rapidly and provide a visible record of the particles path”.

He goes on to point out how energy inefficient high speed particle colliders are. Most of the energy is dissipated in the momentum of the resulting collection hurtling away from the collision.

“Thus to create a pion of rest energy 135MeV it is necessary to give the incoming proton at least 290MeV of kinetic energy. This is called the threshold energy for pion production.”

It means the incoming proton must be moving at about 2/3rds c - and that is only for pion production. To produce larger particles far greater speeds are needed, calling for far larger colliders of vast expense. Frequently in proton-proton collisions extra particles appear seemingly from nowhere. The most numerous are pions – small mesons that can be neutral, or positive or negative. They rapidly decay into muons and then either electrons or positrons and some radiation which is always the final terminus for all decays.

The orthodox explanation for pions appearing is they are created from the energy in the collision.

I argue that they are briefly formed from ep pairs drawn from the potentia by the collision energy but are too few to maintain a choreia with an encircling surface charge and so can only fall back.

In more energetic collisions of protons, a heavier meson called the kaon appears at 493 MeV and in ten billionths decays to a pion and then a muon and so on….

Fowler again: “on raising the energy of the incoming proton further, more particles are produced including the anti-proton, a negatively charged heavy particle which will annihilate a proton in a flash of energy.

It turns out experimentally that an anti-proton can only be produced accompanied by a newly created proton”

The colliding protons remain intact because protons are the irreducible structures of the cosmos. They never decay when free and cannot be destroyed in collisions for there is no lower mass baryon to decay into. But very energetic collisions can draw in large numbers of ep pairs from the potentia and form proton and anti-proton pairs.

Why do they then mutually annihilate?

All protons have the same choreia, (and neutrons also have the same choreia, for they are protons underneath their surface dressing). But anti-protons have an opposite choreia (their internal ep pairs dance the opposite way). As protons are positive and anti-protons are negative they must draw together, but on entering each other their opposite choreias cannot dance together, they disrupt each other completely and disintegrate. They all fall back into the potentia with a blast of radiation as their surface charges form positroneum and also fall back.

All composite particle anti-particle pairs destroy each other because of opposite choreias. However, all protons being positive repel each other and cannot mix their choreias, and the same is true for anti-protons. Protons attract electrons but place them in their orbital surround to form atoms, (anti-protons can similarly place a positron around them to form anti-hydrogen very briefly).

If neutrons are really protons underneath, then anti-neutrons are really anti-protons underneath their reversed dressing and their choreia will be opposite and so will annihilate with the neutron if they collide, and that is indeed the case.

There is no antimatter, instead there are opposite choreias that cannot integrate.

In a proton anti-proton disintegration a starburst of pions is seen in the detector. At least three +pions and three - pions appear, but sometimes up to nine pairs may be seen.

In violent collisions new particle antiparticle pairs with opposite choreias can be formed and this is because there is no plasmoid to weave just one type of choreia. This can only be done in the plasmoids of galaxies.

If the cosmos was only particles colliding, it would be a cosmos of particles and antiparticles, and they could not construct anything. It is because of plasmoids in galaxies that matter has only one choreia and antimatter has only a brief existence. Particle collisions are inevitable but only produce self-destructive antimatter locally and occasionally. They are a side effect not the main product of creation.

Plasmoids need galaxies to provide the electric currents and magnetic fields and gravitation in order to operate. But galaxies of stars could not exist without the matter that plasmoids create. The chicken and egg are eternal in this Universe.

Close, Marten and Sutton, in their book `The Particle Explosion` provide many beautiful illustrations of particle tracks in bubble chambers and other detectors.

THE FORMATION OF MATTER.

Only ep pairs come from the potentia. Every other particle, whatever its mass or charge, is formed in the cosmos from the ep pairs drawn from the potentia.

There is a fundamental difference between particle creation in a galactic plasmoid, with its well-ordered environment, and the violent collision points of relativistic particles out in space.

When particles collide at very high energies they draw ep pairs from the potentia in large numbers which form high mass particles. These cannot form stable choreia and rapidly break down to less massive particles. Their surplus ep pairs shower out as various mesons, particularly pions, and ultimately and very rapidly they all reduce to protons or neutrons, electrons and positrons. The energy of the collision is dispersed in gamma and neutrino radiation.

If we consult the table of mesons we can see the progression downwards.

Starting with the D mesons 1069 MeV, brevity ten billionths, they all break down to kaons and then to pions and then to positive or negative muons and finally, as always, to electrons or positrons. All mesons are composed internally of ep pairs in quark groups and brief unstable choreias. As they disintegrate their ep pairs fall back and disappear into the vacuum and emit radiation as they do so.

This progression of mesons differs from that of the baryons which lose their excess ep pairs as kaons and pions but the main body of the baryon ultimately stabilises as protons and neutrons.

The mesons break up completely into electrons positrons and radiation.

Both these progression are known to us from the close study of high speed collisions.

At low speeds protons repel and curve around each other emitting braking radiation in the same way that electrons do. At higher speed they repel strongly and bounce apart elastically.

At relativistic speeds their close approach head on makes it possible for both of the surface positrons to momentarily combine forces and pull an orbital electron onto the surface of one of the protons and combine with its positron partner and convert the proton to a neutron.

At the highest relativistic energies, colliding protons can produce an additional proton anti-proton pair from thousands of ep pairs drawn from the vacuum.

These collision points are not the normal process of creation but they are the only window we have to observe and measure how particles interact and breakdown. Collision points are centres of disorder not of creation. This is where large numbers of massive unstable very brief composite particles appear and disintegrate.

This disorder is reconciled at very high speed into the stable order of the proton neutron, electron and positron. In these fast progressions we are glimpsing the universal reconciliation at work.

The Muon has long been a puzzle and an anomaly in the great scheme of things. Muons are not composite, they always revert back to single electrons or positrons, depending on their charge, but why are they 210 times more massive at 105 Mev. If you refer to the table of mesons you will see that the Pion is 139 MeV and reverts to a Muon and that reverts to an electron or positron shedding energy as neutrino and gamma. There is the Kaon 493 MeV and that always reverts to pions then muons then electrons and radiation. All the higher mass mesons revert very rapidly to showers of pions or kaons and so on down to electrons positrons and neutrino and gamma radiation. They appear to be collections of high mass electrons and positrons and a lot of energy.

I argue that all these mesons only appear in high energy relativistic collisions in space, (or in earthly particle colliders) In these violent collision points electron positron pairs are actualised from the vacuum and their normal rest mass is instantly increased by extra speed in addition to extension c. Their inertial mass then stabilises at the balance of relativistic speed and mass increase.

A low relativistic speed balances at the muon inertial mass. At a higher speed it balances at the pion inertial mass. At still higher speeds several ep pairs combine to form the compound high mass mesons from kaons to upsilon. All of them rapidly break into showers of kaons, pions, muons and electrons positrons and lots of radiation.

All these are relativistic mass increases balancing at various permitted values. They only occur in violent collision points in space; they do not occur in plasmoids which are the only centres of creation which in their highly organised and nonviolent activity can draw ep pairs from the vacuum at normal rest mass and combine them into the choreia of protons and neutrons. The wild unorganised activity of collision points only keeps the galactic atmosphere stirred up.

SPIN AND CHARGE.

Dirac`s equation describes a spinor field in which rotation of the wave function through 360 degrees does not bring it back to its original state as it would for a physical body, it has to turn another 360 and reach 720 to be back to the state it started from. At 360 its wave function psi becomes opposite psi and as it reaches 720 it becomes psi again and so on …as it ceaselessly turns.

This is occurring in the potentia, and the alternation of psi and opposite psi is the state of electron positron pairs in the potentia. This continual alternation is instantaneous and has no time interval. In effect, electron positron pairs are combined in one wave function endlessly turning.

But psi and opposite psi are potentially distinguishable when the forces of the cosmos stimulate the wave functions of the potentia to separate psi and opposite psi. This separates electrons with one value of spin and charge from positrons with an opposite spin and charge. This slight separation while in the potentia distinguishes their negative and positive charges sufficiently as to enable the unity of innumerable ep pairs to separate enough to polarise and so be able to carry electric charge instantaneously across the potentia between charged particles and bodies out in the cosmos, and also influence their motions magnetically.

Under more powerful cosmic stimulation the wave functions separate psi and opposite psi, and then the electrons of negative charge and intrinsic spin, and the positrons of positive charge and opposite spin emerge into the spatial and temporal existence of the cosmos. Then they become fermions of opposite half spin and opposite charge.

They enter the cosmos from a state of instantaneity into spatial and temporal extension at c. This extensioning is restrained by the unity of the Universe holding the cosmos in balance so it cannot disperse. The continuous creation of particles gives them their rest mass continually and unceasingly. Creation maintains them in their existence whether at rest or in motion. They are oppositely charged fermions with inertial mass, and their joint wave function remains with them always, and works with the wave functions of other pairs to weave the choreia of protons neutrons and nuclei.

What separates remains united, and what becomes many is still one. The division of charge into negative and positive is the action of the Universe dividing and uniting through them.

The division of their spin is more complex.

Electrons and positrons are spinning rings of charge enclosing an interior space so they have a size but their shape is that of an action not a thing. We can only apply analogies to it drawn from our earthly experience and visualise them in our imagination as a spinning ring of charge enclosed by the magnetic field they induce.

I could then say that the electron spins either left to right or right to left from the viewpoint of a hypothetical observer.

It is an established fact that electrons can spin in opposite directions. This enables them to occupy atomic orbitals in pairs as long as they spin oppositely.

Out in space, individual hydrogen atoms have one electron orbiting which can occasionally switch its direction of spin and emit a very characteristic 21 cm radio wave which our radio telescopes use to map clouds of hydrogen in the galaxies.

Positrons also spin in opposite directions, but it can`t be in the same way as electrons. If electrons spin left to right, we could say that positrons spin at right angles to them, spinning over and over, pole over pole either towards or away from a hypothetical observer. This duality of charges and spins results from the duality in the wave function psi and opposite psi. This duality is dormant and potential in the potentia but becomes actual in the cosmos as they become oppositely charged fermions of opposite half spin.

All matter is structured from the spinning charge rings of electrons and positrons. All the cosmos is composed of charges spinning as they are being established into the cosmos at their rest mass. The ep pairs actualise into an extensioning cosmos from the contiguity of the potentia. Contiguousness and extensioning balance out and produce the cosmography that surrounds us.

This balancing results in an endless shifting of relationships in the contiguity. This is the contiguity which reflects the motions of the cosmos. This is the seed of space and sequence of events.

TO SUMMARISE.

Electrons and positrons spinning oppositely are gathered together in their thousands to form the baryons and the mesons and most importantly, the protons and neutrons of atomic nuclei.

What distinguishes the proton from the anti-proton and the neutron from the anti-neutron? It can`t be a difference of spin because all composite particles have equal numbers of electrons spinning one way and positrons spinning at right angles to them. In this respect all baryons and mesons are the same. What distinguishes the different particles is the way their internal companies of ep pairs dance in their choreias. Protons and anti-protons dance oppositely and if they join together in an inelastic collision as their unlike charges draw them in, they disrupt each other`s choreias.

The same applies to neutrons and anti-neutrons and indeed to all composite particle- antiparticle pairs.

Neutrons are really protons dressed with an electron positron pair on their surfaces and they have the same choreia as protons.

Within the nucleus, protons can convert to neutrons and vice versa, as the balance of the proton neutron ratio requires.

The choreia of the atom as a whole also includes the orbital electrons, each one a partner to a positron on the surface of each proton. It is all one choreia. When a proton converts to a neutron its surface positron draws in the electron that is its partner from the orbitals and they form a stable positroneum pair encircling the surface of the proton to form a neutron. That positroneum is stable because it is part of the structure of the nucleon.

If a neutron converts to a proton its surface electron returns to the orbitals leaving a proton to which it remains as its partner. If a neutron is a dressed proton then an anti-neutron is a dressed anti-proton and if they collide and enter each other their opposite choreias will disintegrate them.

The matter anti-matter opposition is greatly over dramatized. Electrons and positrons are not antiparticles. In the potentia they are in union and when drawn into the cosmos they spin oppositely but they work together to form composite particles. These are choreia of dancing multitudes of ep pairs, and if they dance the same way they build up greater and greater structures of matter. Only if they are dancing oppositely and mingle do they disintegrate the structure..

In the plasmoids of the galaxies creation occurs as the cosmos draws ep pairs from the vacuum potential, and in these plasmoids they only form protons and neutrons and nuclei. Electrons and positrons cannot annihilate each other for they have nothing to annihilate into. They can only form positroneum briefly and fall back into the potentia.

THE SAGNAC EFFECT.

Extension and contiguity are one and simultaneous as the nature of light shows. The opened out cosmos and the closed up contiguity are not opposites or contradictories, they are complementary acting together as the Oneness and Manyness of the Universe. We, at our standpoint within the cosmos must see it divided and spaced out, but we can understand that it is contiguous and one. As the structures of the cosmos move so the contiguity in perfect synchrony is altering relationships and interactions. It is we who must see this in two states of being for we exist in a moment of time and place. As the cosmos is moving so the contiguity is altering. We can just glimpse this in the behaviour of light when we use very high precision interferometers. Wavelengths of visible light are only trillionths of a cm. They can be undulating in perfect phase together or out of phase, and an interferometer can detect out of phase differences even at trillionths of a cm. It can therefore detect the shifting of relationships in the contiguity as the cosmos moves.

The Sagnac effect can show these wavelength shifts even at very low speeds.

A beam of light from one source is split by a half silvered mirror into two oppositely directed beams that are reflected by a series of mirrors that lead it in a circular path that encloses an area.

This interferometer is then mounted on a turn table that spins at very high speed (but no-where near light speed); it is then a Sagnac interferometer.

When it is not spinning, the light travelling in both directions around the ring will show No interference fringes in the receiver.

The apparatus when it is spinning Will show interference fringes. This is taken to mean, in the orthodox view, that the light beam travelling around the ring in the same direction as the turntable is spinning, will have its wavelength shortened because the receiver is moving towards it while the light is travelling. The opposite beam will have its wavelength lengthened because the receiver is moving away as the light is travelling. The out of phase difference is directly proportional to the speed of rotation.

I argue, from the point of view of the contiguity, that it is not wavelengths altering in the space of the cosmos.

The emitting and receiving atoms are distant and moving relative to one another in the cosmos, but in the contiguity there are no distances and so there can be no movements. There, the emitters and receivers alter their relationships as they are interacting. The wavelengths in our detectors show this by being in or out of phase.

It is this shifting in the contiguity that causes the Doppler shift of light from moving atoms; and also the cosmic redshift; and also the restrained acceleration under gravity; and finally atoms revolving in a circle, as is the case in a spinning turntable. Any motion in the cosmos is reflected in the altering relationships in the contiguity and light can reveal it by interference fringes.

The Sagnac effect can be used globally to synchronise clocks around the world that are linked wirelessly or by cable. On a nonrotating planet their signals would always be in phase, but the Earth rotates at about 1/2 km a second and a series of linked clocks around the equator with their signals travelling in opposite directions around the planet will show interference. They have an angular velocity that alters the interactions in the contiguity.

The Sagnac effect is used to synchronise the global positioning system and its numerous linked satellites that are transmitting and receiving.

It can also be used to measure the speed of rotation of the Earth without referring to the fixed stars.

In 1926 a huge interferometry ring 1.9 km in circumference was set up by Michaelson and Gale. Their aim was the same as that of George Sagnac in 1913, to find out whether the motion of the Earth through the aether affected the speed of light at the Earth`s surface. No evidence appeared for that, but their ring was so large it could detect the angular velocity of rotation of the Earth at their location. Their measurement was the same as astronomical measurements. They were in effect measuring the rotation relative to the cosmic extensioning at c, because extensioning at c is the difference between the cosmos and the contiguity.

There are two ways of thinking about this. Often it is easier and more practical to visualise light as travelling through space and altering as It goes. On the other hand one can think of it as interactions in the contiguity with emitters and receivers shifting in synchrony with the motions of the cosmos. Because of angular velocity of the rotating platform the emitter is slightly shifting onto or off the receiver by minute differences of phase as they are interacting.

WAVES.

In Earth`s dense air, sea and solid ground we live among waves of disturbance. Shocks and vibrations move through the ground, waves move across the seas and sounds spread through the air.

In solids the atoms and molecules are closely packed and they relay disturbances atom to atom at speeds depending on their densities. In the sea the molecules are less closely packed and can move relative to each other. Disturbance causes circular oscillations of the water molecules, but leave them in place as the disturbance moves on, rotating molecule after molecule, (this is a wave as distinct from a current which does move molecules across distance.)

In the atmosphere the molecules are separated and loose, and a disturbance of sound causes them to briefly move back and forth in the direction of the disturbance. Solid, liquid and air are all earthly contiguities of varying densities and waves move through them in all directions affecting all adjacent molecules as the wave widens out from its source. So there is a particular aspect and there is a general aspect. An earthquake vibrates the whole planet but its greatest effect is felt at one point on its surface. Major disturbances in the sea affect all of it but some shores suffer tsunamis. Sounds in the air spread out but have a particular direction that our wide set ears can distinguish. As a wave in any medium spreads outward, it diminishes in its power to move molecules as their number goes on increasing and uses up the energy of the wave.

All this is very obvious and I only lay it all out so as to put it in a wider context. We live in a world of contiguities with waves acting across them. Beyond them, or is it behind them or within them? is the vacuum potential of electromagnetic fields and emerging particles.

One of the principal obstacles to our understanding of light is that we live in a dense contiguity full of waves.

There is a profound difference between sound and light. A sound that I might make in our atmosphere could be heard by a thousand pairs of ears because the sound wave spreads out to affect every molecule in the vicinity within earshot. It all happens in space and time and the speed of the wave depends on the density of the medium and not on the speed of the source or the receiver. If a listener moves towards the sound the waves don’t alter speed, but the listener receives the wave more rapidly and that increases the pitch of the sound for that listener only.

Light is quite different. It is not a wave affecting many receivers but just one electron interacting with just one other electron momentarily. An electron in one atom alters its orbital to a lower one, and its excess energy is transferred directly to another electron in another atom raising it to a higher orbital level. There is no spreading wave to affect other atoms. This is because it occurs in the contiguity of specific electrons momentarily interacting as extensioning of space is occurring.

Let us say an electron in a window pane across the street interacts with an electron in a retinal molecule in my eye. Only my eye will be involved, not a thousand eyes. But of course trillions of atoms are in the window pane and their electrons interact one to one with trillions of electrons in atoms in the neighbourhood, but it isn`t waves spreading outwards. Light is specific interactions and it is not a wave at all. Earthly contiguities are in space and time, but the universal contiguity that light acts in is not in our time and space.

There are levels behind levels in this Universe. Beyond our space and time there is a universal potential from which the creative power, rationality and purpose of the Universe pours forth in the charged actions we perceive as electrons and positrons and the structures they form. This potentiality can only be inferred by our intellect as being beyond the vacuum of space that the structures of the cosmos exist in. Space is simultaneously contiguous and extensioning, as is shown by the nature and behaviour of light. Extensioning is not an outward movement in space because it is restrained by the unity of the Universe.

The interplay of gravity and inertia is another example.

The cosmos does not evolve, but within it the forces of charge and gravity gather matter into galaxies of stars and planets. What is separated is united and what was formless in the potentia becomes a limitless multitude of structures in an ordered cosmos.

Planetary surfaces provide the environments and the highly reactive and receptive contiguities of water and air in which biospheres of life can develop. Living organisms are instantaneities that can form in them.

The large complex biological molecules will combine to form living organisms. This requires the combined activity of the molecules and their underlying context.

I speculate that the large molecules have an electro-magnetic penumbra generated by their complex ceaselessly interacting structure of charges, and this organises the molecules of water around them to form a matrix in which the molecules can remain stable. Then they can interact as molecular unities from which autonomous organisms can appear. The advent of life is only possible because of the very unusual nature, structure and behaviour of water molecules. Water can be said to be the midwife of life and only planets with oceans will have it.

THE BALANCE OF MATTER AND ANTIMATTER.

There is no matter antimatter opposition in the destructive form it is assumed to be. There is only the electron positron duality which manifests the universal duality of attraction and repulsion, unity and separation, one and many.

Creation forms protons from the fundamental duality of electrons and positrons. Protons are formed with a positron encircling their surface and its paired electron attendant outside in the orbital levels or beyond them in nearby space.

Charge in the cosmos is often separated locally but always within an overall balance.

In a very close encounter between two protons, the two surface positrons on them are momentarily close together and that concentration of positive charge directed at one of the attendant electrons pulls it onto the positron it is already paired with and in that instant joins it on the proton surface to form a neutron, (electron dominant, positron subordinate.) The other proton and its electron are not changed.

I believe that electrons and positrons being paired in the potentia remain paired in the cosmos permanently in all that they do together, including falling back into the potentia.

Protons repel protons and cannot form a nucleus. Protons only attract antiprotons and cannot form a nucleus. There has to be a balance of attraction and repulsion and that can only be obtained with the presence of neutrons.

The seven to one universal ratio of protons to neutrons is the result of the operation of the plasmoids in galactic centres. There the interactions of protons produce neutrons and then helium and other nuclei. Neutrons formed in excess of the cosmic balance quickly revert back to protons and electrons. But within nuclei, protons and neutrons can change into each other to maintain the ratio needed for a stable nucleus.

These interactions within the plasmoid generate the radiation we observe in their centres.

The cosmos is always balancing charge. Electrons and positrons always enter the cosmos in pairs. In the cosmos every proton has an attendant electron nearby, and indeed every antiproton will have an attendant positron nearby during its brief existence. Every neutron has an ep pair around its surface. The interiors of all composite particles contain equal numbers of electrons and positrons interacting in one choreia.

This balancing applies to the vacuum potential as well. The potential ep pairs are said to be charge condensed, meaning they only exert their attraction on each other. But if this were total, they would be inextricably one and could not separate for they could not repel. Being simple fundamental actions they are not composite and cannot disrupt each other. I argue that they are held simultaneously separate and united by being in an infinite `ocean` of ep pairs, all attracting and repelling each other as one. They are all ‘charge balanced’ rather than charge condensed. The vacuum potential has to be thought of as one-many from which all charge, mass and spin of particles emerge as the cosmos eternally acts upon it and separates them. The charge balance of the potentia is similar to the charge balance of a stellarsphere such as the Sun where gravity balances charge.

MAGNETIC MOMENTS.

All composite particles and all the matter they make up is composed of ep pairs and nothing else. These electrons and positrons are charge flowing in rings enclosing an interior space. This flow of charge induces a magnetic field to close around the ring and it becomes a magnet with north and south poles. When electrons move around protons in atoms they exert magnetic force but in atoms with a full complement of paired electrons their magnetic fields cancel out and the atoms are nonmagnetic. However, there are some atoms where the magnetic fields of some of the electrons are not cancelled out. In the atoms of Iron, Chrome, Manganese, Cobalt and Nickle, the electrons are not all paired in their spins, which would cancel their magnetic effect, and so they can act as magnets and makes the Iron group magnetic.

But when any charged particle is alone and flying free in space it is a magnetic dipole, and so are atoms and molecules with too few or too many electrons. They can then be turned and directed by magnetic fields external to them. This tendency to be turned is called their magnetic moment. The external magnetic field in space is interacting with the particles dipole field and exerts a turning force or torque upon the particle, causing it to move into the external magnetic field. The power of this torque is greatest when the particle is crossing the field at right angles to it. It is least when the particle is moving in the same direction. Its path is then field aligned and force free and then its own inertia carries it along the field.

This is of central importance in the workings of the cosmos. The cosmos is filled with charged material of every kind exerting magnetic force, and there is a vast complexity of interlocking interacting magnetic fields filling all space. Charged matter interacts with it and is directed to move within this cosmic pattern of forces. It is as though the magnetic fields of the cosmos are a matrix upon which all matter is moved.

The magnetic moments of particles are the result of their constant circulating loop of charge and the area it encloses is the seed of extensioning.

C. Lucas, ‘Common Sense Science’.

The charge is measured in amperes and the area in square metres. The object being measured is inconceivably tiny, and we are using enormous units of measurement. For the electron it is 9.27x10-24 amps/sq metre and for protons and neutrons it is much smaller still at 5.05x10-27 presumably because their internal multitude of ep pairs pulls inwards. The torque exerted on them by the external magnetic field is less because they are 2000 times more massive.

According to helicon theory electrons outside the atom have a larger radius of their loop and a larger area it encloses than the proton. The interior ep pairs exert no electrical or magnetic force on the outside world. It is the enclosing surface positron of the proton that exerts the magnetic moment as it circles around the surface of the proton.

The neutron although encircled by an ep pair which neutralise each other, still has a very slight magnetic moment opposite to that of the proton, perhaps due to the dominant electron on the surface.

A particle, considered as a magnetic dipole, can be visualised (as far as the subatomic can ever be visualised) as a ring inside a magnetic sleeve and pointing in some direction. An external magnetic field will act to point it into that field. A magnetised compass needle free to turn is an example of a magnetic moment turning into the direction of the Earth`s magnetic field.

VORTEX THEORY.

It has been suggested by several physicists, critical of the standard model, that protons (and neutrons too) are better visualised as some form of vortex – i.e a coherent structure of energy whirling around an inner space.

In powerful plasma devices in laboratories, plasma vortices often form. They are usually millimetre sized and last fractions of a second, but long enough to photograph and study. They are called plasmoids or spheromaks and interact far more strongly when spinning the same way.

Eric Lerner is a physicist who has suggested that protons and neutrons may be vortices because of the way plasma can readily form vortex like plasmoids. They act as if they had a handedness, distinguishing between left and right, and indeed plasma vortices do snow this. Plasmoids spinning oppositely – one turning left and the other right, on close encounters will annihilate each other just as particles and anti-particles do. (They are brief assemblies of ep pairs drawn from the vacuum dancing oppositely and dsintergrating each other when they mingle)

In the late 19th century some scientists discussed the possibility that atoms were vortices in the aether.

Paul la Violette is a physicist who has taken that idea further in a more dynamic way. Subatomic particles are pictured as a system of energy spinning around an internal space. Searching for a visual form of this idea, he uses an image taken from Theosophical speculation about the ultimate unit of physical existence. This is a product of intuition not observation but I think it is a very useful one and can help our understanding of an extremely abstract subject. Of course, pictures are only aids to our imagination; the reality is actions not things.

Pratt, `The farce of modern physics.`

La Violette writes: “Vortical structures similar to these drawn by Besant and Leadbeater have been observed at a macroscopic level in plasma physics experiments. For example: the plasma focus device – a high current spark discharge -- is observed to produce spherical vortices measuring about half a millimetre across. Each such plasmoid consists of eight or ten electric current plasma filaments twisted into a helical donut shaped structure that closely resembles these here illustrated.”

I may add here that they are similar to Belttami geometry. Electrons and positrons are spinning rings of charge and they could comingle into dynamic structures like Beltrami figures. They also occur naturally as ball lightning.

The orthodox quark theory predicts that protons should interact approximately 25% more frequently if their spins are aligned in the same direction than if spinning oppositely. But experimental evidence from proton collisions shows that protons interact up to five times more frequently if their spins are parallel. This implies that proton spin is not a combination of various quark spins but is a single unit of spin. This confirms the helicon theory that the unit spin is exerted by the surface positron alone, and which also provides the unit charge and magnetic moment. It can also reverse its spin.

AN ELECTRO DYNAMIC ANOMALY.

In this collection of ignored or derided discoveries by physicists, I want to give an airing to “A problem in electro dynamics” by Henry Aspden in an internet article. It concerns the unexplained acceleration of protons and ionised nuclei flowing in a current opposite to that of electrons.

Electro dynamics was founded 200 years ago upon the experiments of Ampere, Volta, Faraday and others, and was confined to the interactions of electric currents moving in closed circuits in metal wires. In their day there was no notion of the units of electricity – electron and proton. They studied electric and magnetic forces and Newton`s laws were assumed to apply as current carrying wires attracted or repelled each other.

Later, in the 19th century electricity was studied as it passed through vacuum tubes or tubes of very low pressure gases. In these the units of electricity were flowing freely through space from negative cathode to positive anode or vice versa in the tube. A great deal was discovered, not all of it appreciated or accepted.

In 1930, E Kobold published his findings in the Physical Review vol 36. He had noticed that energy was being acquired by positive ions subjected to an acceleration in a cold cathode gas discharge tube as these ions flowed towards the negative cathode. He found this acceleration inexplicable. The effect of electrons flowing oppositely towards the positive anode and parallel to the protons but outside their path, was to speed up the protons even though they are 2000 times heavier. As he put it: “the motion of the electric current exerts anomalous electro dynamic forces that accelerate the heavy ions to higher than expected speeds.” The orthodox view sees no basis for electro dynamic forces acting along the line of the ion current flow path but the evidence for it is clear.

J Reece Roth in 1978, working on fusion energy research and grappling with the so far unsolved difficulties of stabilising and confining plasma in magnetic fields, found that something was causing the heavy ions to pick up speed far more than the electrons did.

Plasma is not a gas, and the gas laws which work to equalise temperature and pressure and density do not apply in plasmas. A fact not as well-known as it ought to be.

Aspden speculates that this out of balance linear force which speeds ions up along their forward motion, originates from the underlying aether, but cannot explain how. He speculates that the charge interaction itself develops a turning couple as if it were a twist action on that something.

Aspden sums up these findings as follows:

“Taking into account the mass differences, charge difference and the distance between ions and electrons, we find that:

1 A slow moving ion with an electron moving closer will gain speed slightly.

2 A slow moving ion with an electron moving away will reduce speed.

3 A fast moving ion with an electron moving closer will accelerate. A fast moving ion with an electron moving away will lose speed rapidly.

“The net effect of such charge interaction dynamics in a plasma must cause each positive heavy ion, on average, to have kinetic energy far in excess of the average electron.”

My own speculation is that this phenomenon is important in maintaining the interstellar currents of protons and electrons that power the stars, and may have a part to plin the dynamics of galactic plasmoids.

I argue that every proton always has a paired electron from which they are never permanently separated. This union ensures that even when flowing in interstellar currents, their speeds match so that they can always act together at the end of it. It isn`t that one pulls on the other, but rather that they must stay together.

THE W BOSON.

The standard model of particle physics, which is in urgent need of revision, teaches that massless and chargeless gluons hold the protons and neutrons in the atomic nuclei together, and hold the quarks within them together. Conversions of protons to neutrons and v.v are believed to be mediated by W and Z bosons.

It is assumed as an article of faith, that all particle interactions are mediated by massless chargeless photons between electrons in atoms. That massless cnargeless gluons mediate between nucleons in nuclei, while massless chargeless neutrinos carry surplus energy away. In these ways energy and charge are exchanged. But in the heart of the nucleons, working among their constituent quarks, are very massive exchange particles called W and Z bosons. They are classed as virtual particles for they can exist for only an exceedingly limited time and act within an exceedingly limited space. The W boson is calculated to have a mass over 80 times that of the proton and its energy has to be `borrowed` for a very short period of time while it converts nucleons and then must pay this energy back. The transaction has to occur within 10-24 second. This means it can never leave the interior of the nucleon and cannot possibly be detected. This is why it is called a virtual particle.

Briefly endowed with this energy it can change a down quark into an up quark thereby altering a neutron into a proton. Because of Heisenberg`s uncertainty principle it can borrow energy for a very brief time from other particles to produce a very short lived boson and then this energy has to be returned to the particles.

But where does it really come from and where does it go? Is the Universe really run like a banking business?

It is Heisenberg who is mistaken, and his obstacle of a Principle needs to be shoved into the ditch and leave the road open for the advance of science. As I have argued in previous sections, the conversion of protons to neutrons and v.v is due to the movement of electrons and positrons in these nucleons under the electromagnetic force. There is no W boson; it is a monstrosity of the uncertainty principle.

James Wesley refutes Heisenberg`s principle in Physics Essays, 1996 vol.9. In summary, he argues that it is logically and scientifically unsound and empirically false. It applies only in certain restricted measurement situations and does not represent a limit on the knowledge we can have about the state of a system.

He gives six examples of the experimental failures of this principle.

In particular: the momentum and position of an electron in a hydrogen atom can be known to an accuracy of six decimal places.

QUARK MASSES

Quarks are not things with their own mass spin and charge; they are simply dancing groups in the choreia of all the ep pairs in the interior of a proton, neutron or any composite particle. They are actions not things and they do not have a mass any more than a waltz or tango has. If they did have mass it would seem obvious that the three quarks would each have 1/3 of the mass of the proton.

Attempts have been made to find the quark mass by comparing the masses of the various baryons and mesons in their decay products, but the comparisons of masses have always been completely inconclusive. There is no conserved constant for a quark mass.

Theorists have fallen back to the energetic activity of many gluons and virtual quarks within the proton to account for its overall mass. (Such speculation does, I think, point to a choreia). However, it is mistaken to think that quarks are two or three substantial and irreducible objects inside the composite particles, which is why the arithmetic is inconclusive. Instead, there is an intricate ever changing interaction, and what we call quarks are shifting alliances or patterns in the choreia. They have no charge of their own to exert outside the proton for they are only collections of ep pairs charge concentrated. The overall unit charge of the proton is provided by the surface positron encircling it, so there is no need to divide unit charge into thirds. The charge of the electron and positron is an irreducible absolute.

THE RELAYING OF LIGHT.

To reach us from distant stars their light is relayed by the atoms in space forwarding it on to us. This is to picture it as photons travelling and interacting with one atom after another.

The alternative contiguous way of picturing it, is atom to atom directly in contact momentarily as they interact across the contiguity of the cosmos.

If we observe the pinpoint of light from a star using two mirrors set in an interferometer, we see a spread of the stars light. When the mirrors are set close together we see an interference pattern as light from one mirror shifts in and out of phase with the light from the other mirror.

Still focussing on the sane star the mirrors are moved apart and the interference pattern disappears. The spread of light depends on the stars angular size or image in our instruments. Very distant stars nave very tiny images and they show a larger spread in an interferometer than nearer stars do, which is not what you might expect.

I argue that there are only atoms interacting directly and relaying directly to us in the contiguity as the cosmos opens out. Most of the light we receive is relayed along the line of least action, but it does include light that isn’t relayed exactly along the line of sight. It comes in to our receiver at angles and widens the beam we receive and causes the spread that the interferometer shows. This would explain why very distant stars would have a wider spread than nearer ones, for there would have been more acts of relaying, and the atoms relaying it were not always in the exact line of sight or were fast moving.

An emitter and receiver have to be in phase, and if we think of their relation in spatial terms as the shape of their waves, then they must be aligned. If we think in terms of their actions they must be synchronised. In the contiguity seen by us as relaying across distance, light can pass through gas in space from atom to atom and finally through an atmosphere. Most of it is perfectly aligned which is why we get such sharp images of very distant galaxies, but there is a small degree of misalignment which an interferometer can show if we move its mirrors back and forth.

POLARISATIoN

Light as we receive it is usually polarised. The photon is assumed by orthodox theory to be a wave packet (meaning a wave confined to a very small volume as it travels). Its electric component is either spinning upwards or sideways as it approaches us. We measure this as its polarisation and it always manifests in just two opposite values, such as up/down, or left/right. Waves in our world don’t spin, but it is a way of speaking about what are really actions not things, but indeed light does impart spin.

A beam of polarised light all spinning the same way will impart a measurable torque to dust grains, and at the sub atomic scale to electrons as well. When an electron in an atom absorbs a photon it is given energy and rises to a higher level. It means the spin of the photon is transferred to the electron giving it precisely the energy to rise.

It is often easier to treat light as photons when discussing polarisation. But if we think of it as interactions in the contiguity, then the spins of the emitting electron and the receiving electron must add to unity and the momentum must belong to the atoms, which alone can have mass and can move each other in the recoils we measure. Because it is always an atom to atom interaction, the spins of emitting and receiving electrons must be in synchrony. This explains why polarisation is always a pair of exactly opposite values. It also explains why light can cross the cosmos over vast distance without fogging up. The emitter and receiver have to be perfectly in phase in the contiguity. It may be a single interaction bridging the whole distance, but more probably it requires a series of relaying interactions. Each relay has to be in perfect phase alignment all the way.

It is remarkable that we clearly see galaxies hundreds of millions of light years distant. The most common gases in space such as hydrogen, helium, oxygen and nitrogen are extremely transparent.

What applies to polarisation of light applies to the magnetic orientation of atoms.

In 1921, Stern and Gerlach made an experiment which is one of the most important in the history of physics. They sent a beam of ionised hydrogen through a magnetic field to land on a photo film which could record the path they took. Ionised atoms are no longer neutral and can behave like little magnets with north and south poles.

When the field was completely uniform in intensity then the atoms scattered through it and landed on the film uniformly. They then reasoned that if they graduated the field in intensity from top to bottom those tiny atomic magnets which were vertically aligned should feel a stronger force on their upper ends and should move either up or down, depending on which of the poles was at the top.

Those whose poles were horizontally aligned would, presumably, not be affected at all and would land in the centre. It was taken for granted that the atoms entering the field would be a random crowd with poles pointing in all directions and would still strike the film evenly from top to bottom.

Instead they found that the atoms struck the film in only two places having been deflected by equal amounts up and down. It seemed the atomic magnets were forced to line up, either parallel with or opposite to the magnetic field, with no other orientation in between. No matter how the field was lined up it always split the beam into two opposite orientations.

If it were true that they were being forced to adopt only two alignments it ought to be possible to catch them in the act by using a brief and weak field that didn’t have time or strength to alter them. This however was not the case; once they had passed through it they only registered two alignments with no exceptions. Why do they always split in equal numbers up or down? Because the protons are ionised they can act as magnets and be turned in a magnetic field. They have an encircling positron enabling them to be magnets and the positron can spin in only two ways, conventionally termed up or down. Free electrons behave in the same way because they are charges spinning in only two ways, but oppositely to positrons.

I maintain that all electrons and positrons in the cosmos have exactly equal numbers of opposite spin. What turns up in physicists measurements (and what occurs in natural phenomena out there,) are always lawful and rational, but unpredictable for us in individual quantum events.

In this cosmos, we can distinguish a background and a foreground. The foreground is the events we observe as the world is being created; it is mostly unpredictable and we can only quote odds for this or that event to occur.

There is a background which is lawful rational and coherent and directs creation. We glimpse it in the Schrodinger equation where all is simplified to the abstraction of wave functions, universal, superposed and all present to each other. In my view it represents the dynamic of the Universe. It is lawful because it is limited to what is coherent consistent and unitary, (not a limitless phantasmagoria). It is purposive because it is all reconciled, (not an endless random shuffling).

Schrodinger`s equation symbolises the background, and we use the analogy of waves on an ocean which act as one and endlessly roll forward to a conclusion.

It is as if we stand on the shore of the created cosmos and see a vast dark ocean of the potentia rolling towards us and breaking at our feet in a tumult of light and the events of our lives.

ABERRATION OF THE STARS.

As we stand on the surface of an orbiting planet we see the starry sky at night slowly moving from east to west as the Earth rotates from west to east. There is a much subtler and less noticeable effect on the sky as the Earth revolves around the Sun in the course of a year at 30 km per second. In 1728, astronomer James Bradley noticed that stars seemed to shift position because of the Earth`s motion around the Sun. He realised it must be due to the velocity of the Earth being a small but measurable fraction of the speed of light. Because of it, astronomers must angle their telescopes slightly to accommodate the difference in the two speeds, and as the Earth curves around its orbit that angling has to follow it. From the amount of angling he had to make he calculated the speed of light as being 176,000 miles per second, a higher and more accurate value than that of Roemer`s fifty years earlier and only 5% less than the modern value of 186,000. Ever since then the explanation for this need to angle telescopes has been based on the assumption that light travels through space at a fixed speed. This was Eddington`s assumption when, in the 1920s he used the analogy of a man with an umbrella running through rain falling vertically. He would have to tilt his umbrella forwards through an angle to stay dry. That angle is the result of his running speed and that of the falling rain. (speed of running is the Earth`s motion, and speed of rain is the speed of light), but of course this is only an analogy.

If we resort to geometry and draw a right angled triangle with the speed of light on the vertical and the Earth`s motion on the horizontal and the tilt of the telescope is the diagonal; then if we denote the speed of light as c and the speed of the Earth as v, what will be the speed of light down the angled telescope? It will be the square root of the sum c2 + v2 and that turns out to be greater than c.

But why should light speed up in an angled telescope? If the speed of light in the tube is corrected to c then the diagonal closes up to the vertical side of the triangle, which is the speed of light. What does that mean? It means that light is not falling vertically from on high.

Contrary to orthodox physics, light acts instantaneously in the contiguity of electrons emitting from atoms in the stars, and atoms receiving them in the lens of the telescope and the eye of the astronomer.

Does the speed of light slowdown in the tube so that it does not exceed c?

In 1871 the astronomer Airey filled a telescope with water which should slow down light passing along it as the water molecules relayed it and took time to do so. As a result the angle would need to be reduced, but the water had no effect.

To speak more generally; in the course of a year, as the Earth follows its almost circular orbit, each of the stars traces out on the sky a tiny version of that orbit. Up in the zenith they trace out a circular motion, but towards the horizon stars trace out a more elliptical figure which flattens out to a line at the horizon. This is called the ‘figure of aberration` and it is proof positive it is due to the Earth`s motion. The movements of the stars themselves have nothing to do with it for they all show the same effect. All the stars are apparently locked to the motion of our planet because light is instantaneous and the whole starry sky will be seen by us to move with the Earth. Every planet will show a different figure of aberration in its starry sky depending on the speed and shape of its orbit.

Aberration is the product of instantaneous light and a moving receiver. Electrons in the stars and electrons in the telescope are contiguous and instant to each other, but at the same time the telescope is being carried forward by the Earth`s motion. In that instant there is both extensioning and contiguity occurring simultaneously.

That all the stars in the sky show the same aberration proves that the light from them all is instant, and that is why the movement of the whole sky moves synchronously with the Earth`s orbiting.

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE POSITRON

Almost all positrons in the cosmos are within compound particles which make up nuclei. Within those nuclei they have an indispensable and permanent part to play, but outside them their existence is brief.

Protons cannot lose their surface positron because they cannot become a lower mass and chargeless particle. How could a proton eject a positron and become a heavier neutron? Protons become neutrons by drawing their attendant electron onto their surface while retaining their surface positron. In this way nuclei maintain their isotope balance, and they do not eject positrons to do it.

However, nuclei can be disrupted by high speed protons entering them from outside.

In a violent incursion of a proton into an Oxygen 18 nucleus, for instance, it becomes the ninth proton and expels a neutron, and converts the nucleus to Flourine 18, but no positron is ejected. The neutron forced out soon reverts to a proton and an electron somewhere in space.

The nucleus as it reorganises its energy levels emits gamma radiation and this, so close to a nucleus, raises electron positron pairs from the vacuum. They are momentarily at rest and can form positroneum and then fall back into the vacuum releasing their rest mass energy as two .5ll MeV gamma photons. It is these that are used in Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scanning and can be detected by a special camera as they leave the site of the nucleus. This technique is now widely used in medical examination.

More generally, cosmic particles from outer space hit the atoms of the upper atmosphere and disrupt their nuclei and produce high energy ep pairs. This is why positrons are detected in the upper atmosphere, but these ep pairs don’t last long. They are also detected above thunderstorms where high voltage electrical discharges are occurring.

TO SUMMARISE AND CLARIFY.

The furthest back we can go in our understanding is the mathematical concept of the wave function. This is a Universe of wave functions so superimposed and one as to be in effect one wave function opening into many and remaining one. They have a spin of an unearthly kind – a double rotation through 720 degrees. This is its state in the potentia when it is the wave function for an electron positron pair spinning as one, their charge concentrated only on each other, and having no mass.

As it emerges into the space and time of the cosmos its double spin divides, the electron spinning one way and the positron spinning at right angles to it. Their charge divides into negative and positive. What was potential becomes actual, from our point of view out here in the cosmos. They enter space as spinning rings of charge enclosing an interior space (the fundamental unit of extension) and spin with a rate of rotation (which is a fundamental unit of time.) They enter the cosmos from instantaneousness into extensioning of space at c which is prevented from endless expansion by the unity of the Universe. This is a restrained acceleration which manifests as their rest mass. But immediately upon emerging they are caught up in the electro-magnetic and gravitational forces and are set in motion in the space and time of the cosmos. This acceleration is in addition to their restrained acceleration at extension c and produces relativistic effects on their mass and placement as their own speed approaches the speed of light.

All matter and energy in the cosmos comes from the potentia and is stimulated to emerge by the cosmos acting upon it. Both are co-eternal co-infinite and have no beginning. The universal power of creation works in them - we call it Energy, or the creative power of Nature. It is unceasing and maintains all things in existence in the cosmos so that mass, energy, charge, magnetism and spin are unceasing and therefore cannot end. Because creation is unceasing, electrons and positrons pour into the plasmoids in the galaxies that have always been drawing upon the potentia. The great plasmoidal structures at the centres of galaxies fashion the ep pairs into protons and neutrons with their attendant electrons, from which the atoms can be formed.

In the Plasmoids the electrons and positrons are assembled and their opposite charges, spins and magnetic moments are combined into a ceaseless choreia (dance, computation, reconciliation – call it what you will), which includes the dancing orbitals of the attendant electrons. Collectively all its members exert inertial and gravitational forces on the masses of the cosmos outside them because of their unceasing creation at c. The outer valence electrons of atoms exert charge on other electrons.

I use Helicon theory to suggest that the choreia of the whole e.p assembly places one positron on the proton surface to revolve around it and provide unit positive charge and spin exerted on the cosmos. Its paired electron is placed in the orbital system surrounding the proton and is also part of the choreia.

A single proton with its paired orbiting electron is a hydrogen atom. If its electron leaves the orbital system the proton is a positive ion and can interact directly with other ionised protons.

When they come close together in collisions their combined surface positrons can pull one of the paired electrons back onto one of the proton surfaces giving it a positroneum pairing of electron and positron circling the proton and together converting it into a neutron with higher mass and neutralised charge.

The positroneum “dressing” becomes part of the overall choreia for a neutron. If the neutron is not in a nucleus associated with protons it will not maintain this structure for more than 15 minutes average and the electron will fall away into the orbitals and the proton re-emerges just as before.

When neutrons and protons are associated together in a nucleus they act together in a nuclear choreia and the neutron does not decay for it has a central part to play.

Protons are all positive and repel one another extremely strongly and it is the neutrons that hold them together. The positroneum on a neutron`s surface has an electron which is attracted to the positive charges of the protons and pulls on them. The choreia is such that the electron is active and dominant momentarily and then in the next moment electron and positron combine and neutralise each other. The neutron is alternately negative and neutral negative and neutral… This alternation is exceedingly rapid and another of the ultimate units of temporal interval and sequence of events.

As the protons in a nucleus repel, the neutrons with equal but opposite negative charge draw neutrons and protons together and bind the nucleus, then in the next instant the neutrons become neutral and the protons start repelling apart, then the neutrons become negative and draw all together again and so on…

In this way every nucleus is expanding and contracting in an ultimate unit of time.

In all nuclei there is an optimal number of neutrons to protons which constitutes a stable nucleus and a stable isotope of that nucleus. Too few neutrons or too many relative to protons, are unstable isotopes with decay times varying from seconds to millions of years. This decaying is radioactivity. The overall choreia of the nucleus adjusts the ratio to optimal by a neutron ejecting its electron and becoming a proton, or a proton capturing its electron from the orbitals and combining it with its positron to become a neutron. Protons and neutrons have the same internal choreia but play complementary roles in the nuclear choreia. This forming of nuclei from just protons and neutrons is achieved in the galactic plasmoids in calm organised conditions.

Out in space where particles can fly free at near light speed their collision points are violent brief and unorganised, and unstable high mass particles abound and rapidly decay, and antiparticles appear and annihilate; but this is not the work of creation.

It is collisions that particle physics has to study for want of an alternative, but it still gives us a vast amount of data about all sorts of particles.

We know that protons moving at near light speed and colliding head on, impart so much energy into one point of the vacuum that enough ep pairs are drawn out of it to form a new proton and antiproton pair besides the two colliding protons. It is only in such collision points that antiparticles appear and soon vanish.

The positive proton and the negative anti proton inevitably draw together, enter each other and then their oppositely dancing choreias disintegrate them into pions and radiation.

When anti-protons are violently collided together they convert one of them to an antineutron in a similar way that protons can produce a neutron. Their combined negative charge draws the paired positron out of the orbital into the antiproton and dresses it with electron subordinate and positron dominant. When neutron and antineutron meet they disintegrate into pions and radiation.

As the experiments at CERN have found, very high energy collisions can draw huge numbers of ep pairs out of the vacuum to form massive particles far exceeding the proton but so unstable they only exist for billionths or trillionths of a second and always reducing to protons and neutrons as the final products that do endure.

The neutron can reduce to a proton but a proton cannot reduce to anything less massive than itself. It is the foundational structure of the cosmos. Similarly the anti- proton cannot reduce to anything less massive, and in theory could last indefinitely if it could avoid contact with protons.

There are far more protons than neutrons in the cosmos because the overwhelming majority of atoms are hydrogen, with one proton and no neutron. It constitutes ¾ by mass of the cosmos. Almost all the other ¼ is helium with two protons and two neutrons. All the other elements with many extra neutrons only amount to 1% of the mass at most. The result is there are seven times more protons than neutrons. (The Big Bang theory teaches that at the very beginning of the Universe as it cooled down sufficiently for protons and neutrons to form, the neutrons had just 15 minutes to find a proton and form a nucleus of deuterium or helium before decaying to a proton; rather like Cinderella hurrying home before she turns back into rags as the clock strikes midnight.)

What part do anti-protons and anti-neutrons play in the great scheme of things? They seem to have no part to play in the atomic nucleus.

The anti-neutrons would have a surface positroneum with positron dominant ahd electron subordinate, so they would alternate positive and neutral and intensify the positive charge repulsion and scatter the nucleus.

On the other hand, a nucleus of negative anti-protons and neutrons alternating negative and neutral would not bind together either.

So there is only one way for the cosmos to organise and operate. Its logic converges on one result. The Universe in all its activity reconciles to one cosmos, and we are its progeny and co-creators.

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER FIVE

CURRENTS AND THE ATMOSPHERE OF THE GALAXY 238

WHAT IS RADIOACTIVITY ? 242

THE FORMATION OF MATTER 247

SPIN AND CHARGE 240

TO SUMMARISE 252

THE SAGNAC EFFECT 253

WAVES 255

THE BALANCE OF MATTER AND ANTIMATTER 258

MAGNETIC MOMENTS (diagram) 259

VORTEX THEORY (diagrams) 262

AN ELECTROMAGNETIC ANOMALY 264

THE W BOSON 266

QUARK MASSES 267

THE RELAYING OF LIGHT 268

POLARISATION 269

ABERRATION OF STARS 271

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE POSITRON 273

TO SUMMARISE AND CLARIFY 274